US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
News ::
Boston Peace Rally - Nov 3 - Boston Common (english)
26 Oct 2002
Modified: 30 Oct 2002
On November 3 at 1 PM a peace rally will begin in Boston Common.
10,000 demonstrators are expected!!! Bring Drums!!! Bring Puppets!!! But mostly, Bring Yourself!!!
After an hour or so, we will begin a march through the streets of Boston, and then return to the rallying spot around 3:30 for another set of speakers and music. Sponsored by United for Justice With Peace and other peace groups.
Spread the word!


Flyer available at http://www.afsc.org/nero/pesp/events.htm

On November 3 at 1 PM a peace rally will begin in Boston Common.

After an hour or so, we will begin a march through the streets of Boston, and then return to the rallying spot around 3:30 for another set of speakers and music.

The speakers will include:
Howard Zinn, historian and professor;
Jill Stein, Green Party candidate for Governor;
Bishop Thomas Shaw, Episcopal Church;
Layla Cable, with the view from the other end of the bombing in Iraq;
Chuck Turner, Boston City Councilor;
Paul Camacho, professor and veteran of the Viet Nam war; and
Randy Forsberg, peace activist and write-in candidate for Senate to unseat John Kerry.

The music will be live, with rock to reggae and not too much folk. Buddhist drummers will lead the march. Interest in the rally has been widespread, and we expect in excess of ten thousand people. The more people we can rally, the greater momentum the still-fledgling peace movement will have.

There is no way to peace. Peace is the way. You are the peace movement.

It is not surprising that so many people in our region are interested in the rally. New England is the home to prophets of peace and nonviolence from Henry David Thoreau to William Lloyd Garrison; it is where Frederick Douglass took his stand and where Emily Dickinson cultivated a distinctive voice of ringing dissent. Ours is the region where Martin Luther King engaged Gandhi and William Sloan Coffin taught peace. We know why we are turning out for peace, but we must show the rest of America what a peace movement looks like.

In New England, we know that our local communities are alive and well, and can quickly respond to crisis by showing up in large numbers on Boston Common. But this fact is something that we must teach to the Bush Administration and to those members of our Congressional delegation who voted "yes" for this war. The conscience of our region has been stirred, and in colleges from Hampshire to Harvard, in homes from Penobscot to Narragansett Bay, Providence to Provincetown, and in churches, synagogues, mosques and ashrams from Montpelier to Hartford, individuals and entire communities are saying NO to this war.

We will demonstrate that we oppose the cycle of militarism that is coming exclusively to characterize American foreign policy.

We don't want an open-ended and expensive war in Iraq.

We say NO to the large-scale killing of Iraqis.

November 3 will embody and advertise a set of principles. It will display democracy in action, in the tradition of the town meeting. It will remind our fellow citizens that dissent is appropriate and that Constitutional rights exist for those who assert them. It will bear witness for peace.

And it will be fun.
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.

Comments

Sounds great, but... (english)
28 Oct 2002
one question?

Is this a non-sectarian event or will groups of anarchists be asked to leave like last time because "we donīt want to look so radical. We are dissenting patriots here"?

Oh wait, sorry, we werent asked to leave, we were only asked to either a.stay far, or b.march on the other side of the street. How is that for sectarianism and dividing a movement!

Why was all this you ask? Because we said that yes, if attacked by police, we would fight back. Suddenly, we were dangerous and unwelcome. Nevermind that we organized the first anti-war march post 9-11 while everyone was still cowering under their collective first world privilege, and nevermind that there has never been the slightest problem at these marches.

Authoritarian pacifists, gotta love them.

Anyways, we will be there Nov. 3rd, like it or not, and sooner or later as things heat up people will begin to see past your complacent moralism and move on to more serious things.

BRING THE WAR HOME
CHAOS IN THE METROPOLES
FOR THE CLASS WAR AGAINST STATE AND CAPITAL
See You November 3rd (english)
28 Oct 2002
There will be a large anarchist presense in the streets on November 3rd. We may against war on Iraq, but we are certianly not advocates of peace. There will be no peace with the capitalist war machine, regardless of whether they invade Iraq or not. WE WILL BRING THE WAR HOME.
violence begets violence (english)
30 Oct 2002
I would urge you to read up on your Gandhi. Sometimes you guys scare old ladies who come out to protest this war. The peace movement is made up of everyday people. Don’t forget there are not very many of you out there and while I think we would agree this system of government is totally fucked...just remember violence begets violence.
which anarchists would this be? (english)
30 Oct 2002
Which anarchist would this be making this post? Sorry, guys, but this doesn't stand up. Which rally are you even referring to? I remember that last Fall, the rally on October 14, which was organized by several anarchists under the banner of UJP had a strong anarchist presence. Some people in the 3000 person crowd didn't know that the anarchist contingent would be marching in separately, and I wouldn't be surprised if a few middle-class folks made annoying comments, but so what? It wasn't coming from the organizers. That's very different than being ordered to leave the march or march separately. I didn't work to organize the one this Spring, on April 20. The demo had some presence from community groups with strong anarchist presences, though my impression is that many folks were in DC. Again, while there was some bullshit with police saying that people couldn't march and then marching around the block a bit, I didn't observe anyone telling anarchists to leave, nor was there any talk of it afterwards. Am I missing some history here? If you had a poroblem, is there a reason you didn't take UJP to task for it immediately, as you should have? That would have been productive--anonymous hostility and sloganeering here doesn't build a thing.
Who said anything about violence? (english)
30 Oct 2002
When Bush was in town last month, a contingent of perfectly non-violent anarchists were singled out by members of the local peace police for wearing black and masks and asked to leave the march.

Why the rhetoric of "violence begetting violence"? As if we are oblivious to the concept of cause and effect. We live under a violent system, and often it is necessary to meet this violence with counter-violence. This does not in any way imply that anarchist have plans to bring violence to the November 3rd anti-war demonstration, however, we are human, and if attacked we have a right to defend ourselves.

Also, some of us are quite well read in Ghandi, thank you very much. There is a famous Ghandi quote that often gets overlooked by pacifists: "If given the choice between cowardice and violence, I would choose violence." Regardless of what we may think of Ghandi, his strategy of nonviolence relied heavily on the pressure of armed struggle in India at the time (much as Martin Luther King relied heavily on the ghetto uprisings and armed nationalist groups of the '60's), the fact that Great Britain was financially crippled in the post-war period and as a result could not maintain itself as an imperial world power, and the fact that his movement was a CROSS-CLASS BOURGEOIS INDEPENDENCE MOVEMENT. Never once did Ghandi challenge the Indian ruling caste, their power or wealth. We are fighting a different struggle than what Ghandi fought, against a very different enemy. Ghandi will be of very little help in the struggle that await us in the future.
Good to know (english)
30 Oct 2002
So this happened at that October 4 thing? Okay, I wasn't at that one. But for anyone to urge people to leave a demo, unless they've broken clearly-expressed guidelines, is stupied and counter-productive. My impression is that that whole thing was put together on the fly, and this weekend's probably won't have people acting that way. I know one of the the womean coordinating the peacekeeping this Sunday --don't think she was there on the fourth either--and I know that her approach to peacekeepers is that their job is to chill out conflicts with hostile passers-by and provocateurs before they get dangerous or give the police an excuse to shut things down. But I wouldn't be too worried this time around.

One unrelated note--Gandhi actually did challenge the caste structure very much in various campaigns--he did not only work on independence. That's certainly not to say that other Dalit (low-caste) activists always agreed with him, or that he was their "leader." But he did work on it a lot. And I wouldn't assign the blame for the structure of the Indian state that emerged on Gandhi--a lot of that came from Nehru and other Congress party folks.